CHAPARRAL

As we all too well know, decisions made at the state level can have a profound impact on our students and our classes here at Glendale College.  The fiscal crisis of California and the state government’s attempt to grapple with it weighs heavily on all of us.  But a host of other laws and policies affect us as well.  In this article I would like to sketch the relationship between our Academic Senate and the Academic Senate of the California Community Colleges (ASCCC).  I also would like to highlight one of ASCCC’s recent decisions to illustrate that relationship.

     GCC’s Academic Senate is a voting member of the ASCCC and is represented by them at the system level of the California community colleges.  The Academic Senate of the California Community Colleges operates in a similar way to our own Academic Senate.  Just as we consult with our Board of Trustees in academic and professional matters, so too does the ASCCC consult on those matters with the California Community Colleges’ Board of Governors (BOG).  The CCC Chancellor is the state equivalent of our President/Superintendent, and the ASCCC along with other organizations representing faculty, administrators, classified staff and trustees meet regularly with the Chancellor in the Consultation Council.  (The Consultation Council’s nearest equivalent at the college would be the Campus Executive committee.)

     Communications between the ASCCC and local senates is greatly facilitated twice a year when faculty from around the state attend the plenary sessions of the ASCCC.  The focus is on academic and professional topics of concern (and sometimes of urgent concern) to the community colleges.  The most recent plenary took place in November with a series of workshops and culminated in a voting session, where the body took official positions on more than thirty resolutions covering topics from accreditation to curriculum to grading.  Joe Denhart, Paul Mayer, Peggy Renner, Frankie Strong, and I represented Glendale College.

     The ASCCC has been the key academic player in changes to Title 5 regulations (the policies approved by the CCC Board of Governors that govern community colleges).  Thus, the requirement that all colleges require college-level mathematics and English for graduation originated in the ASCCC.  It is also the ASCCC that determines the disciplines list which establishes the minimum qualifications for teaching at the colleges.  (Our own disciplines list either adopts these minimum qualifications or raises them, but may not lower them.)

     To me, of course, the topics of most interest were ones that resonated with our own concerns here at Glendale.  In particular, accreditation and student learning outcomes produced a resolution of interest.

     As you may know from the October Guild meeting, the California Federation of Teachers sent the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) a letter objecting to Commission requirements about SLOs and faculty evaluations.  To quote Marty Hittelman, the author of CFT’s letter:  ‘Of particular concern to CFT is the propensity with which accreditation teams from the ACCJC have indicated to the colleges that they should "develop and implement policies and procedures to incorporate student learning outcomes into evaluation of those with direct responsibility for student learning."’  Hittelman goes on to say that this “intrude[s] on matters left to collective bargaining by the Legislature.”  CFT’s position, not surprisingly, is that if there are going to be changes to faculty evaluation procedures, such changes, by California law, must be negotiated with college unions.  (And senates, also by law, need to be consulted on evaluation procedures.)

     In response to this concern, the ASCCC passed a resolution which contained the following two resolves:

● Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges affirm its opposition to including the attainment of student learning outcomes as an aspect of individual faculty evaluations; and

● Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges work with the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges and with other concerned statewide faculty organizations to ensure that accreditation recommendations do not use student learning outcomes in any manner that would undermine either local bargaining authority or the academic freedom of individual faculty members.

Note that the resolution does not reject the validity of student learning outcomes or the accreditation process itself.  After a period of criticism, the ASCCC has come to support both SLOs and a changed role for the ACCJC as a much superior alternative to the federal government demanding mandatory exit testing at colleges a la No Child Left Behind.   Rather, the ASCCC agrees with the CFT that the ACCJC has preempted the collective bargaining relationship mandated by California law.  It is heartening to see faculty cooperation between senates and unions on this issue at the state level.  As we all know from our experience at the college, the Guild and the Senate are one and the same faculty—they just wear different hats.

     Other resolutions of interest include:

● A resolution defining Associate of Arts and Associate of Science degrees:  “Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges support defining the Associate of Science degree in Title 5 Regulation as an associate degree in the areas of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics or in the area of career technical education, with all other associate degrees given the title of Associate of Arts…” (This will result in a migration of our science and math degrees to AS degrees instead of the current AA degrees, if the CCC BOG adopts the recommendation.)
 

● In response to a recent legal advisory from the Chancellor’s office which is having the effect of reducing the use of TBA hours by colleges:  “Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges express its concern about the lack of timeline and clarity in Chancellor’s Office Legal Advisory 08-02 and request that the Chancellor’s Office suspend its implementation as it is unworkable and unreasonable…”

(For a complete list of resolutions, contact me at senpres@glendale.edu.)

     I have attended ASCCC plenaries for the past couple of years now, as well as in the past.  I must say my admiration for the depth of the discussions and the passion, commitment and conscientiousness of my peers around the state continues to grow.  It is truly an educational experience, grounded in a deep philosophical consideration about what is good for our students.  I would highly recommend that faculty take the opportunity to attend, if and when our travel budgets get restored.  But that’s another story… &

back to top